This site uses cookies.

Pleadings and fundamental dishonesty: Howlett affirmed as film director’s compensation claim is dismissed - Jeff Turton, Weightmans LLP

26/09/18. David Pinkus v Direct Line [2018] EWHC 1671 is an example of another claim being dismissed under section 57 Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. The claimant raised a preliminary issue as to whether the defendant should be prevented from arguing the claim was dishonest at all.   The facts  The claimant was involved in a road traffic accident on 21 August 2012 with the defendant’s insured. Liability was admitted, but the value of the claim was hotly disputed. The claimant, who claimed that he suffered from profound psychological/psychiatric symptoms which resulted in his loss of a job as an assistant film director, valued his claim at £850,000. The defendant accepted that the claimant sustained some injury but, having identified a significant number of credibility issues in respect of the claim, valued it more conservatively at £2,000-£3,000.  The claimant raised a preliminary issue at trial, which was that the defendant was not entitled to argue the claim was fundamentally dishonest, on the basis that the issue was raised too late and the related pleading was defective.

The pleadings issue

In its updated counter schedule of loss, which was served less than one month before trial, the defendant contended that the claim was fundamentally dishonest. The original defence made no such allegation.The claimant objected to...

Image ©iStockphoto.com/

Read more (PIBULJ subscribers only)...

All information on this site was believed to be correct by the relevant authors at the time of writing. All content is for information purposes only and is not intended as legal advice. No liability is accepted by either the publisher or the author(s) for any errors or omissions (whether negligent or not) that it may contain. 

The opinions expressed in the articles are the authors' own, not those of Law Brief Publishing Ltd, and are not necessarily commensurate with general legal or medico-legal expert consensus of opinion and/or literature. Any medical content is not exhaustive but at a level for the non-medical reader to understand. 

Professional advice should always be obtained before applying any information to particular circumstances.

Excerpts from judgments and statutes are Crown copyright. Any Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of OPSI and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland under the Open Government Licence.